15926.org

I have taken the time to make the ISO 15926-4 spreadsheets referenced here[1] machine readable so that I could compare them to the contents of the RDL at the PCA endpoint.

.xls files are not very friendly to read since they support far too many features and provide to much history in the files. The work has been to:

- change headers so that they are consistent throughout the spreadsheets
- clear all empty whitespace
- redo borders

The .xls files were then converted to .csv files (with , "" in utf-8). These are much easier to parse.

Everything is available at: http://fluffyelephant.com/iso15926/

Håvard

1: http://www.caesarsystems.co.uk/iso/ts/1 ... /index.htm

What kind of comparison you are planning? In my understanding completely new mapping of these spreadsheets is required to include all data in RDL. To do such mapping a number of decision should be taken. For example, whether to map alternative URIs to alternative URIs, or to common string identifiers. Whether to map to ClassOfIdentification or to corresponding template? If identification is classified - what class of identification is required in RDL?

I have written sparql queries for these coloumns:

Unique name
Text definition
Notes
superclass 1
superclass 2
superclass 3
ISO 15926-2 entity
classification 1
classification 2
classification 3

I always presume that the unique name can be found in the RDL by using "hasDesignation" [1].

Then I show any difference in a table. There are some differences and we are working on categorising the differences and making a plan for managing the changes for the ISO meeting in November in South Korea.

1:http://posccaesar.org/rdl/page/RDS9698147